1 Based on observation of
world, thus posteriori +
inductive (based on
assumptions not logical
1.1 Telos= end goal/purpose
1.1.1 Looking for a
purpose or end to
suggest that there is
a divine creator
2 Fifth way- Characterised as a "Design qua
regularity of succession" argument as he
outilnes that natural things regularly follow
the same order.
2.1 Everything in the universe
appears to be working in
some sort of order
2.1.1 Particularly, "natural bodies"
behave in a regular way.
126.96.36.199 Daffodils flower in spring time
188.8.131.52.1 Natural bodies may "lack intelligence"
in the sense that they are not conscious
beings but even so they move/act with
184.108.40.206.1.1 Aquinas suggests that these
things cannot provide their own
movement due to a lack of
220.127.116.11.1.1.1 He suggests this
movement does not occur
18.104.22.168.22.214.171.124 This means that their movement, regularity and
purposefulness has not come about by chance but
something else has caused these "natural bodies" to
behave in a regular manner.
126.96.36.199.188.8.131.52.1 Analogy of arrow-
Arrow can only fulfil
it's purpose of hitting
the target if it is
guided by an archer
184.108.40.206.220.127.116.11.1.1 Similarly the
things is directed by an
18.104.22.168.22.214.171.124.1.1.1 The analogy of the arrow is
used to demonstrate the link
God to creation.
126.96.36.199.188.8.131.52.184.108.40.206 Unintelligent beings could not achieve
their purpose without being directed by an
intelligent being. (E.g an acorn could not
grow into an oak tree)
220.127.116.11.18.104.22.168.22.214.171.124.1 Aquinas concludes; God is the
intelligent being that provides the
regularity of movement and
guarentees the fulfilment of purpose.
126.96.36.199.188.8.131.52.184.108.40.206.1.1 Like Aquinas' 1st and 2nd Way, Aquinas' fifth way can be
connected to Aristotle.The idea of everything fulfilling a
purpose is similar to Arisotle's Final Cause as it is ultimately
the prime mover that makes things reach their purpose.
220.127.116.11.18.104.22.168.22.214.171.124.1.1.1 There is a big difference. Aquinas' archer makes the arrow
reach it's target deliberately; i.e the theistic God has a purpose
for all things. Aristotle's Prime Mover is not interested in the
world+ can only think about himself. Aquinas is thus a theist
rather than simply a follower of Aristotle.
2.2 Can also be seen as a "qua
purpose" argument as he says that
natural bodies achieve their
END/PURPOSE by being directed
by an intelligent being.